Re: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/2/13 11:14 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:

b) There is no interest to research where delay really happen. Your statistics just tell that there is delay but not why (of course). From my own experience I noticed that there are many reasons for delay and I am not sure I can blame it to the IESG reviews for most of the delay. It is only during the IESG review phase when the problems surface that could have been tackled much earlier.

Without looking at a number of cases we might focus on the wrong issues. Maybe, but I am not sure, there is something that can be generalized from some individual cases.

I am happy to work with someone else to go through a couple of different IETF activities that did not really go as planned to "reconstruct" what went wrong. I suggested this in the past but it is of course not fashionable and exciting.

The big delays on documents in my queue (e.g. one's that I inherited) are almost exclusively of author or wg holds the token again or blocked on some other document variety. the tail is pretty long, whether it's heavy or not for a visibile minority of drafts.





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]